Which way would al-Qaeda vote?

(in brief: not much), Economist.com cites Dick Cheney's claim that violence in Iraq is on the rise because

... Iraqi insurgents and al-Qaeda fighters are trying to influence next week's mid-term congressional vote. "It's my belief that they're very sensitive of the fact that we've got an election scheduled," said Mr Cheney. They are trying to "break the will of the American people."

But you could argue equally well, and perhaps more persuasively, that the insurgents would prefer to see the Republicans hold on to power. By their own perverse lights the thugs and fanatics have done well enough from the chaos of the occupation; why should they want it to change now?

Likewise al-Qaeda. Ron Suskind, a former

Wall Street Journal

reporter, in his recent book, "The One Percent Doctrine", discusses a video clip issued by Osama bin Laden in October 2004, shortly before the presidential election, in which he ostensibly bashed George Bush. CIA analysis of the tape concluded that the attack was meant to help secure Mr Bush's re-election. Suskind quoted the Deputy Assistant Director of Intelligence as saying: "Certainly [Bin Laden] would want Bush to keep doing what he's doing for a few more years." Suskind also pointed out that Bush's approval ratings in America tracked with Osama's in the Middle East from 9/11 until early this year, though the correlation has since disappeared.

Lawrence Wright, author of "The Looming Tower", has noted that al-Qaeda long hoped to embroil America in a war in the Middle East. It thought a large American presence in the region would radicalise Muslims around the world, and weaken the United States strategically. Al-Qaeda's strategic aims are as wrong as wrong can be, heaven knows. But its tactical analysis, if reported correctly here, was surely right.

Already signed up or a subscriber? Log in

You’ve reached your article limit

Sign up to keep reading or subscribe now to get full access to The Economist via print, online and our apps.